Feds say all motorcycle riders should be required to wear helmets

[ShadeTreeMech]

Originally Posted by Weather Spotter

As a person who has ridden in the past (still can but choose not to) I say let them choose. I am all for less government restrictions on my life. Give people the facts and let them choose.

Then they can pay for there own consequences.

I agree with the first statement in theory, but in practicality, it is the governement who must pay the hospital bills in many cases when a motorcycler is foolish enough to ride without the helmet and incurs ridiculous bills which he can't pay.

If it is fair for the governement to allow you to ride without a helmet, it is also fair for them to refuse to pay for your bills.

If you like the principle of the gov't covering hospital bills of the uninsured, you'll like a wise gov't trying to cut losses and make people, who expect to be treated at any hospital regardless if they can afford to pay, to wear a 3 lb helmet to reduce damages.

By the same token, anyone talking on the cell while driving should be ticketed the same as a drunk.

[Frank Lee]

Numbers. I need to see numbers for all this money the govt spends on health care for unhelmeted bikers. Everyone seems to know them but me.

[ShadeTreeMech]

Originally Posted by tim3058

Agreed. Totally agree with Frank too, just another example of nanny gov't. If a biker goes down at 65 on the freeway, a helmet does little or nothing, only in the (rare) incident the only impact occured on the top of the head, with no spinal injury.

As a rider who went down going 70 on the freeway, I thank God I was intelligent enough to wear a helmet, and require my passenger (my wife) to do the same. I also required her to wear long pants and a coat despite the 85 degree weather.

Had I not enforced those requirement of common sense, depsite the fact the helmet law in Arkansas was revoked over 10 years ago, I may never have seen my youngest 2 daughters being born.

Helmets are common sense. How can a law requiring the use of common sense be wrong? If you are traveling at 30 mph and don't think you need a helmet at such a low rate of speed, does that also mean the driver of the idiot who hits you will be also going 30 mph? If it is a head on collision, that's a 60 mph crash.

Never underestimate the power of inertia, even at low speeds.

Originally Posted by Frank Lee

Numbers. I need to see numbers for all this money the govt spends on health care for unhelmeted bikers. Everyone seems to know them but me.

Does it matter? You know for a fact at least 1 person has had their medical bills waived for lack of ability to pay after a motorcyle accident. Who ultimately paid the bills but the subsidies that keep most hospitals afloat.

[Thymeclock]

Helmets are common sense. How can a law requiring the use of common sense be wrong?

Motorcycles are inherently dangerous. The risk involved for personal injury or death is obviously much higher than riding in an enclosed vehicle. It's just "common sense". How could anyone be against prohibition of such a dangerous form of transportation? Obviously we need to outlaw all motorcycles. (Police use will be exempted, of course.)

Does it matter? You know for a fact at least 1 person has had their medical bills waived for lack of ability to pay after a motorcyle accident. Who ultimately paid the bills but the subsidies that keep most hospitals afloat.

Ah, so now it is apparent why you are in favor of "subsidies".

Who pays? Who benefits? Those who benefit will never complain about receiving something for nothing. If you were on the paying end rather than the receiving end you would see things differently.

[autoteach]

Its also common sense that when you cant afford something you dont buy it and if you cant take care of kids you pull out, but I dont see that coming to an end. How about I come over to your house and tell you what common sense stuff you are doing wrong, how you should do them right, and how if you dont I will fine you. Suck my common sense, let those too dumb to survive die.

[bdesj]

It all comes out in the wash.

Somebody (the county?) spent an unknown to me, but obviously large, amount of dough to widen the road on a half mile stretch on my daily commute route in order to accomodate a bike lane in each direction earlier this year. As far as I can tell, I`m the only person who ever uses those bike lanes. Thank you.

I have no kids and don`t plan on ever having any, but the biggest part of my property taxes goes to educate OPs kids. You`re welcome.

[bluesfan]

I remember back in the 90s when rocker Billy Idol dropped his Harley in LA and broke his leg. The media quickly pointed out that

Originally Posted by LA Times

Mr. Idol was not wearing a helmet.

Like that would have protected his leg?

[autoteach]

And, to add to the fire... How much do we save when someone dies rather than is critically injured. They dont wear a helmet and... POP, there head explodes. DOA. versus two weeks of ICU and then... same result. It is probable that 50% of the time this happens every time. Everytime this happens, millions are saved (made this up too). Motorcycle accidents always probably occur somewhere between 20 and 100% of the time either between a car and a motorcycle, a motorcycle and a motorcycle, or single vehicle typically involving either loss of bowels, control, or consciousness. Now, if we can just lower the rate of bowel loss, that would be a 33% reduction. Unfortunately studies have not been able to show if the bowels were released pre or post collision.

[Piwoslaw]

So why not shoot the injured? A bullet is cheaper than medical treatment.

[dcb]

As long as you shoot the guy who injured them too